Solving Inequalities

MHF

I think were not gonna have trouble on solving stu like x 1 2, x + 1 3, these are easy 2 and we can solve them in the same fashion as we do when having an equation, but, were gonna focus on other forms of inequalities which need to be treated carefully, these are: Quadratic inequalities and higher degree ones. Rational inequalities. Square root inequalities. Absolute value inequalities. So, Ill be showing some solved problems so that you can learn on how treating these inequalities, so lets start with the Quadratic inequalities and higher degree ones We can have quadratic inequalities like ax2 + bx + c 0 and ax2 + bx + c 0. (Of course including these < and >.) Mostly are solved by nding the roots of the equation ax2 + bx + c = 0 and then factorising the quadratic inequality. I wont be nding the roots, what matters to me is to show you whats the procedure when having an already factorised inequality. Example 1. Solve x2 + 2x 8 > 0. First o, factorise this and get (x 2)(x + 4) > 0 (if you can see it yet, we can do the following: x2 + 2x 8 = (x + 1)2 9 and use the fact that a2 b2 = (a + b)(a b)); now, we have two cases here: 1 either x 2 and x + 4 are both positive (of course they can be zero but take a look at the sign of the inequality, its > and not ), and this is obvious since being both positive, then the inequality will hold. So in other words we require that x 2 > 0 and x + 4 > 0. Now since we want these two things happen, then either x > 2 and x > 4 which written as interval notation we have that x (2, ) and x (4, ) so the rst solution set which satises the inequality will be given as S1 = (4, ) (2, ) = (2, ). 2 either x 2 and x + 4 are both negative, but why? Simple, because the product of two negative expressions will yield a positive one, then we require that x 2 < 0 and x + 4 < 0, and in the same fashion as above, we have that the second solution set is S2 = (, 4). Now, we are almost done, since S1 and S2 satisfy the inequality by their own way, (which means that weve found dierent solution sets which solve the previous inequality), our nal solution set is the union of these, so the inequality holds for any x (, 4) (2, ). Now, how can we prove the truthfulness of the solution? I made a graph of the function x f (x) = x2 + 2x 8, see it below:

Solving Inequalities

MHF

The orange border shows us where the function takes positive values, which is what the solution says to us: on (, 4) (2, ) is f (x) > 0. Now, what if we wanted to solve x2 + 2x 8 < 0? Well, as we can see in the graph, the solution set would be S = (4, 2). So lets consider the following Example 2. Solve x2 + 2x 8 < 0. We already know that this factorises as (x 2)(x + 4) < 0, but the cases we need to study are dierent now. 1 either x 2 > 0 and x + 4 < 0, because being one factor positive and the other one negative, the product is negative, thus x > 2 and x < 4 and the rst solution set is S1 = . (If this is not clear, make a simple graph and youll see.) 2 either x2 < 0 and x+4 > 0 (these are like the inverse cases), then x < 2 and x > 4, thus the second solution set is S2 = (4, 2). The nal solution set is x (4, 2), as expected! In case that the factorisation is not that obvious or hard to nd, just try to nd the roots by applying the formula to nd the roots of the quadratic equation. Later well see a faster method to solve this by using absolute values. Example 3. Solve x3 x. Dont even think and divide by x leaving the inequality as x2 1, this is wrong! You cant do that because you dont know the sign of x, so the inequality could be ipped when dividing by x. As usual, lets factorise and get x(x + 1)(x 1) 0, but, this is more complicated that the last example, wed have to analyse more cases and thatd take a lot of time. The following method is very useful and extremely faster when having these situations. Even when we see the Rational inequalities youll see how this useful method works. 1 Find the zeros of the inequality. The zeros in this case are x1 = 1, x2 = 0 and x3 = 1. 2 Study the intervals given the zeros of the inequality. This means that we need to study the sign of the function for (, 1), (1, 0), (0, 1) and (1, ). 3 Construct a table where in a vertical line you can put the factors and in a horizontal line the intervals. What we want to do here is to analyse the sign of the factors. The table should look like as follows: 2

Solving Inequalities

MHF

(, 1) x x+1 x1

(1, 0)

(0, 1)

(1, )

4 The next step is to analyse the sign of each factor, its an easy task so the table should look like: (, 1) (1, 0) (0, 1) (1, ) x + + x+1 + + + x1 + 5 Now since we know the sign of each factor, its easy to see the sign of the polynomial given the intervals, hence: (, 1) (1, 0) (0, 1) (1, ) x + + x+1 + + + x1 + + + Finally the solution set is x (, 1] [0, 1]. Not sure huh? Graph it and see! Rational inequalities Example 4. Solve 2 < 1. x

I told ya before, do not multiply by x both sides leaving the inequality as 2 < x, written backwards as x > 2. Do you really think this is the solution? No, put x = 1 and the inequality does hold. As said above, multiplying by x it aint correct since we dont know that the sign of x is. Lets do some of algebra: 2 2 2x < 1 = 1= < 0. x x x We can solve this in the same fashion as when dealing with quadratic inequalities. Obviously x = 0, so now either 2x < 0 and x > 0 (because the quotient of two quantities which dier on two signs is negative), then x > 2 and x > 0, thus the rst solution set is S1 = (0, )(2, ) = (2, ). On the other hand, either 2 x > 0 and x < 0 and from here the second solution set is S2 = (, 0). The nal solution set is x (, 0) (2, ). (Another way on solving this: multiply both sides of the inequality by x2 , since its positive the sign of the inequality doesnt ip, but remember that x = 0, so if the nal solution set has the zero in it, youre gonna have to remove it.) Its worth to mention that it couldve been 2 x 0 or 2 x 0, but that does work as long as we have the instead of the < . 3

Solving Inequalities

MHF

Example 5. Solve

5 3 + < 2. x+7 x+5 (x + 2)(x + 6) > 0. (x + 7)(x + 5)

After straightforward algebra, the inequality is Now construct the table and get x+2 x+6 x+7 x+5 (, 7) + (7, 6) +

(6, 5) + + +

(5, 2) + + +

(2, ) + + + + +

Thus the solution set is x (, 7) (6, 5) (2, ). Square root inequalities Well, this kind of inequalities are not that hard, so dont be scared, lets see the Example 6. Solve 13 4x x 2. Note that if x 2 0 is a stupid case, because a negative number is not greater or equal than a square roots (since square roots are non negative); now, we want to square both sides of the inequality to erradicate the annoying square root, but we require that x 2 0 as long as the 13 radicand is well dened, and that holds for x , so in order to make this thing work, we require 4 13 () that x 2, . (Remember, this is just a condition.) 4 Square both sides and get (x + 3)(x 3) 0 which holds for x 3 or x 3. The nal solution set is given by intersecting those sets and () , so the inequality holds for any x on ], 3] [3, [ 2, 13 13 = 3, . 4 4

Now, what if the inequality is ipped? See the following Example 7. Solve 13 4x x 2. Oh, the case x 2 0 makes sense now, because the square root will be always greater than a negative number as long as the radicand is well dened, so the rst solution set here is S1 = (, 2]. (Here we just intersected the sets.) Now we know whats next, we want to square, 13 but we need that x 2, , thus we get (x + 3)(x 3) 0 which now holds for 3 x 3, 4 and the second solution set is 13 S2 = [3, 3] 2, = [2, 3], 4 4

Solving Inequalities

MHF

so the nal solution set is just S = (, 2] [2, 3] = (, 3]. Example 8. Solve x + 6 x + 1 > 2x 5. First we need well dened square roots so we require that each radicand be greater or equal than zero, then intersect those intervals to get a single set which denes each square root, and that 5 one is x . Now write the inequality as x + 6 > 2x 5 + x + 1 and observe that both sides 2 are positive, so we can square and get 5 x > (2x 5)(x + 1), now this is a new inequality, so dont square immediately, because given the rst condition, the left side is not always positive, so 5 we require that x 5 plus the rst condition we get a new condition where x , 5 () , now 2 we can square and get (x 3)(x + 10) < 0, and given () the second factor is positive and this 5 5 inequality holds for x < 3. Hence, the nal solution is S = , 5 (, 3) = , 3 . 2 2 Example 9. Solve 10 x x 2. We require that 0 10, besides the inequality is equivalent to 10 x 2 + x, by x squaring we get 3 x 2 x () , where x 3 is a solution for this last inequality, now x x [0, 3] and square to get (x 1)(x 9) 0 which holds for x [1, 9] and the second solution set is x [1, 3]. So for () the solution set is x [1, ) and the nal solution set is S = [0, 10] [1, ) = [1, 10]. Absolute value inequalities Okay, these seem to be harder, but we need to work carefully. Have immediately in mind that the fact x2 = |x| holds for all x R. First o, inequalities like |x| < 2 or |x| 4 are pretty straightforward to solve, so I wont take care of them. Now, remember the rst inequalities, for example x2 + 2x 8 > 0 (Ill consider the ipped inequality too), now complete the square to get (x + 1)2 9 > 0 = (x + 1)2 > 9, and here were gonna the fact that x f (x) = x is an increasing function, the inequality becomes |x + 1| > 3, now this is just x + 1 > 3 or x + 1 < 3, hence x > 2 or x < 4. Now, whats this? Isnt the same as we got above? Now, what about the ipped inequality? In the same fashion wed get that |x + 1| < 3 and then 3 < x + 1 < 3 = 4 < x < 2, isnt the same? Can you see know how useful is the absolute value? Now Im going to show you one of the most classic absolute value inequalities and youll see the procedure applies on related ones.

Solving Inequalities

MHF

Example 10. Solve |x| + |x 1| < 3. The rst thing we need to do here, its to locate the critical points of the absolute values; so for x = 0 the inequality is true and for x = 1 the inequality is also true, thus the cases we need to study are the following: r x 0, in this case |x| = x and |x 1| = (x 1) = 1 x, so the inequality becomes x + 1 x < 3 where x > 1. Held to the rst condition the rst solution set is S1 = (1, 0]. (The condition couldve been x < 0, but it does include the zero because the inequality does hold.)
r r

0 x 1, in this case the inequality becomes x + (1 x) < 3 and this is always true, so the second solution set is S2 = [0, 1]. x 1, in this case the is x + x 1 < 3 so x < 2 and given the condition the third solution set is S3 = [1, 2). The nal solution set is S = S1 S2 S3 = (1, 2). Example 11. Solve (x 1)3 |x 1|.

The case x makes no sense since the radicand is (x1)2 (x1). Fix x 1 and the inequality 1 becomes (x 1) x 1 (x 1) thus (x 1) x 1 1 0, here we require that x 1 1, then x 2 and the solution set is S = [1, ) (, 2] = [1, 2]. Example 12. Solve 2 |x| > x.

If x 0 then the inequality holds as long as |x| 2, so [2, 0] is a solution set for the inequality. Let x 0 and |x| 2, so we square both sides of the inequality as long as x [0, 2], then 2 |x| x2 , and |x| = x because of the condition, then (x 1)(x + 2) 0 thus x 1 and the original inequality also holds for any x on [0, 1]. The nal solution set is x [2, 1]. By the way, dont bother analysing cases if you face an inequality like |x + 1| |x + 2|, you can just square both sides since both are non negative! Okay, thats all, hope it helps!